GLADIATOR RESOURCES LIMITED

DEVELOPING A LEADING LOW COST PIG IRON PROJECT

February 2011

Disclaimer
The information in this report that relates to exploration results is based on information compiled by Alex Nutter who is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration to qualify as a competent person as defined in the 2004 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Alex Nutter consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. This presentation has been prepared by Gladiator Resources Limited ABN 58 101 026 859 (Gladiator). Each Recipient of this presentation is deemed to have agreed to accept the qualifications, limitations and disclaimers set out below. None of Gladiator and its subsidiaries or their respective directors, officers, employees, advisers or representatives (Beneficiaries) make any representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information contained in this presentation, including any forecast or prospective information. The forward looking statements included in this presentation involve subjective judgment and analysis and are subject to significant uncertainties, risks and contingencies, many of which are outside the control of, and are unknown to, the Beneficiaries. Actual future events may vary materially from the forward looking statements and the assumptions on which those statements are based. Given these uncertainties, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward looking statements. Without limiting the above, data, amounts and financial information contained in this presentation relating to capital costs, operating costs, revenue, internal rates of return, cash flow (amongst other matters) and project timelines are internally generated estimates only. All such information and data is currently under review as part of Gladiators ongoing work and will be reviewed as part of the pre-feasibility and feasibility studies to be conducted by Gladiator. Accordingly, Gladiator makes no representation as to the accuracy and/or completeness of the figures or data included in this presentation. This presentation is a general overview only and does not purport to contain all the information that may be required to evaluate an investment in Gladiator. The information in this presentation is provided personally to the Recipient as a matter of interest only. It does not amount to an express or implied recommendation with respect to any investment in Gladiator nor does it constitute financial product advice. The Recipient, intending investors and respective advisers, should: a) conduct their own independent review, investigations and analysis of Gladiator and of the information contained or referred to in this presentation; and/or b) seek professional advice as to whether an investment in Gladiator securities is appropriate for them, having regard to their personal objectives, risk profile, financial situation and needs. Nothing in this presentation is or is to be taken to be an offer, invitation or other proposal to subscribe for Gladiator securities. Except insofar as liability under any law cannot be excluded, none of the Beneficiaries shall have any responsibility for the information contained in this presentation or in any other way for errors or omissions (including responsibility to any persons by reason of negligence). No Recipient shall disclose any information contained in this presentation or the existence of this presentation to any other person.
2

Investment Highlights

Gladiators Uruguay Project will produce a higher value iron product (pig iron) at more modest capital cost than typical small producers:

Low cost pig iron producer significantly lower cost than

competing Brazilian producers by ~50% due to substantially reduced input costs as feedstocks sourced from:

own iron ore resources; and surrounding timber plantations

Gladiators Uruguay Project

Proven processing technologies Infrastructure in place Close proximity to major US market Strong project sponsors Strong projected cash flow
Highly prospective, underexplored 750km2 landholding prospective for large iron ore, manganese, nickel, PGM and copper deposits
3

Capital Structure & Management

Current Key Statistics (A$)
Ordinary shares on issue Share price Net debt / (cash) First F & M Involvement (Market Cap) Market capitalisation 31-Jan-11 3-Feb-11 31-Dec-10 31-Dec-10 3-Feb-11 113.2m $0.46 $(7.47)m $19.5m $52m

Board & Management

Name Len Dean Role Chairman

Experienced senior mining executive . Previously worked for BHP (36 years), Sesa Goa and consultant to CVRD, Portman Mining and Mitsui Iron Ore Tim Adams Executive Director

Trading History

Experienced mining engineer, senior executive and consultant in the resources sector. Previously worked with BHP, North Ltd, WMC & Portman John Palermo Executive Director

Chartered Accountant with significant experience in corporate consulting and company administration Daniel Bruno Non-Executive Director

Experienced investment industry executive with over 15 years experience in financial markets Stuart Hall Non-Executive Director

Source:

ComSec, company announcements

Qualified geologist with 40 years experience in exploration and mining projects

John Palermo Office: +61 8 9443 1600 Mobile: +61 417 947 059 Email: jpalermo@gladiatorresources.com.au

Daniel Bruno +1 416 861 5935 (Canada) +1 416 616 0958 (Canada) dbruno@gladiatorresources.com

Tim Adams +598 2600 5205 (Uruguay) +598 9108 1188 (Uruguay) tadams@gladiatorresources.com
4

Gateway to the Region

Constitutional republic independence from Brazil in 1835 Population of ~3.5 million

Asuncion 1550km Rio De Janeiro Politically stable current elected 2400km So Paulo 1970km Porto Alegre 870km Buenos Aires 250km

Santiago 1900km

president to remain in office to 2015 Export oriented agricultural sector and tourism major industries Significant continued foreign investment Well educated workforce Secure investment environment Existing port and rail infrastructure with excess capacity
5

Montevideo

Political and Social Stability

Low Corruption
(Transparency International 2010)

Democracy Index
(Economist Intelligence Unit 2010)

Economic Freedom Index

(Heritage Foundation 2010)

New Zealand Norway Ireland Chile US Uruguay France Spain Portugal South Korea Costa Rica South Africa Italy Brazil Colombia Argentina

1 10 14 21 22 24 25 30 32 39 41 54 67 69 78 105

Norway New Zealand Ireland US Spain South Korea Uruguay Costa Rica Portugal Italy South Africa France Chile Brazil Argentina Colombia

1 5 12 17 18 20 21 24 26 29 30 31 34 47 51 57

New Zealand Ireland US Chile South Korea Uruguay Spain Norway Costa Rica Colombia Portugal France South Africa Italy Brazil Argentina

4 5 8 10 31 33 36 37 54 58 62 64 72 74 113 135
6

Modern Infrastructure
Quality of electricity supply (ranking) US 23 25 30 36 37 46 47 56 63 93

World-class port facilities in Montevideo, a regional

hub par excellence for South Americas Southern Cone region

Ireland Chile Spain Uruguay Hungary Italy New Zealand Brazil Argentina

Boasts Latin Americas most dense highway network 2009: new airport terminal, Colonia ferry port and
Montevideo ring road

98% of territory with access to low-cost electricity

(most from renewable sources) and drinking water

Source: World Economic Forums Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011

Quality of Life
Global Peace Index (ranking)

Not prone to natural disasters Tolerant country: no ethnic, racial or religious conflicts Excellent sanitary level Third safest country in Latin America, evidenced by the
booming second home market (Latin Business Chronicle 2009 Index)

New Zealand Ireland Uruguay Spain Chile Italy Argentina Brazil US

1 6 24 25 28 40 71 83 85

Ranked among the first countries, with the

Scandinavian countries and Japan, in U.S.-based Freedom Houses Freedom in the World Survey 2009

Source: Economist Intelligence Unit 2010

Exclusive Option Agreement to Explore & Develop the Isla Cristalina Belt in Uruguay

Option Agreement with

Gladiator (GLA) entered into an Exclusive Option Agreement (Option) with TSX listed Orosur Mining Inc (OMI) to explore and develop the iron ore, manganese and base metals potential in OMIs project area in the Isla Cristalina Belt in Uruguay The Agreement provides for GLA to earn up to an 80% interest in iron ore, manganese and base metals potential in the project area GLA has exercised the Option and has finalized the agreement with OMI

Orosur Mining Inc

US$1 million will earn GLA a 20% interest in project area (expected 2010) A further US$4 million will earn GLA an additional 31% (expected 1H 2011)

GLAs Obligations

By completing a BFS GLAs interest in the project area will increase to 80% Drilling commenced in August 2010 and is expected to continue for 3 to 4 months, with metallurgical testwork occurring in parallel, with more scheduled for first half 2011

Zapucay Prospect Identified for Initial Drilling

Location of New Prospecting Permit on Mineral Reserve Area

10

Exploration Upside from Highly Prospective Isla Cristalina Belt

The project area comprises 750km2 of exploration tenements in the highly prospective Isla Cristalina Belt. GLA has already identified initial iron targets for development.
Ironstone Ridge Swarms

11

Encouraging Initial Drill and Test Results

Drilling of 60 holes for 3,935 metres completed Initial assay results for 11 holes received are consistent with test work and confirm that a high quality magnetite concentrate can be produced Best intersections recorded at Papagayo included:

Drilling and Testwork Results to Date

CPRC 008 53m @ 26.5% Fe CPDD 020 39m @ 29.8% Fe CPDD 018 30m @ 33.2% Fe Best intersections recorded at Iman included: CIDD 023 33m @ 29.9% Fe CIDD 022 18m @ 32.4% Fe CIDD 014 16m @ 31.6% Fe High levels of manganese mineralisation associated with the magnetite have been intersected by the drilling and best intercepts include: CPRC 008 53m @ 13.3% MnO CPRC 026 30m @ 12.7% MnO CPDD 018 30m @ 9.4% MnO

12

Uruguayan Project has Clear Path to Production

Production of pig iron via mini blast furnace technology using the magnetite
mineralisation of the Isla Cristalina and the timber plantations of the surrounding area as feedstock

Development Concept

The pig iron product is readily saleable throughout the world, particularly in the US
and only requires Handysize vessels

Preliminary indications are that the cost of production will be very competitive with
the current main producer, Brazil

Mine Site Initial site has been identified and resource drilling commenced Pig Iron Plant Conceptual study completed confirming low technology risk and
relatively modest capital cost

Key Components

Charcoal Production Charcoal manufacturing technology secured and

abundance of stranded timber plantations identified close to plant site

Infrastructure Project will utilise existing infrastructure

13

Geology Lends Itself To Simple Mining Operations

Typical Magnetite Outcrop

Earlier Sampling
14

Historical Test Results Confirm Mineralisation

Initial sampling and testwork supports historical work undertaken in the project area confirming the existence of magnetite mineralization and suggests the ore can easily be upgraded. Krupp Report (1966)1
Deposits Zapucay Curtame Total Deposit Zapucay Ore Mt. 64.0 41.3 105.3 Fe% 37 Mn% 12 Waste Mt. 26.0 13.8 39.8 SiO2% 22 W:O 0.4:1.0 0.3:1.0 0.4:1.0 Fe/Mn 3

Beneficiation through magnetic separation or dry cobbing and spirals is suggested in the Krupp Report to give a concentrate >60% Fe2 Preliminary metallurgical work undertaken on surface samples collected by GLA indicates a concentrate of >65% Fe and 2-3% Mn can be produced at a relatively coarse grind3
1. 2. 3. This historical estimate is not reported in accordance with the JORC Code and it is uncertain that following evaluation and/or further exploration the resource and reserve will ever be able to be reported in accordance with the JORC Code These results were obtained from rudimentary exploration techniques of pitting and sampling and therefore should be treated with caution. These results may not reflect the metallurgy of the overall deposit.

15

Abundance of Feedstock & Low Technology Risk

The technology risk involved in GLAs pig iron production process is negligible given it is largely is based on existing technologies.
Advantages of DPC Technology Mechanised Non polluting Energy efficient Controlled carbonisation maximum yield Can use as cut timber Shorter carbonisation time

Eucalypt Plantations
Preferred feedstock will be smaller diameter logs produced from the thinning of the surrounding plantations

DPC Charcoal Plant

DPC biomass pyrolysis carbonisation technology which indicates an effective cost of charcoal at about 20% of traditional methods

Pig Iron Mini Blast Furnace Iron Ore Mine & Concentrator
Ore mined, crushed, grinded and screened followed by magnetic separation or jigging to produce concentrate of >66% Fe & 2 3% Mn Principal feedstocks of sinter and charcoal added to furnace with minor quantities of fluxes

Sinter Plant
Iron concentrate sintered (agglomeration of iron ore fines to produce a material suitable for charging of blast furnaces)

16

Significant Cost Advantage over Existing Producers

GLAs Uruguay Project compares favorably to the existing Brazilian pig iron producers resulting in significantly lower estimated operating costs.
Component Description
Access to a supply of ore able to produce a sinterable concentrate of required grade Access to timber supply for charcoal production Must be able to produce for a modest cost Ability to transport finished product to customers

Gladiator Uruguay Project

Ore to be sourced from GLA owned deposits Further test work on quality of ore to be undertaken

Existing Brazilian Producers

Deposits generally not owned by pig iron producers Typically buy from 3rd party suppliers at export prices less rail and port costs

Iron Ore

Charcoal Cost

The region around Isla Cristalina has stranded eucalypt and pine plantation offering very low cost timber feed for charcoal production GLA is securing worldwide (except Brazil) license for the DPC biomass pyrolysis carbonisation technology Ports accessible via road or rail Export from either Fray Bentos Port (~250km); Montevideo Port (~440km); or Rio Grande Brazil (~400km) ~US$220-240/t (est. ~50% less than existing Brazilian producers)

Charcoal supplied by independents trucking up to 1,000kms High overall cost due to transportation and low efficiency

Port & Logistics Infrastructure

~650kms by 3rd party rail

Estimated Opex

Estimated operating cost per tonne of pig iron produced

>US$450-495/t (source: 2010 China International Pig Iron Seminar )

17

Low Cost Base Offers Significant Leverage to Price Increases

Initial financial modelling has confirmed a robust project and GLA is continuing to explore opportunities to further enhance returns.
Indicative Preliminary Financials1,2
Item Unit Result

Commentary
Project uniquely provides investors with direct leverage to the pig iron market At US$500/t project returns are significantly enhanced

Stage 1 Production

000 tonnes p.a. US$/t

396

Preliminary test work1 indicates that a resource of 26Mt can support a 0.4Mtpa pig iron operation for 18 years GLA is targeting an initial resource of 50 100Mt. 100Mt is sufficient to support an operation of 1Mtpa for over 30 years

Sales Price

400

Project Life

Years

>20

Customers likely to be attracted by the high manganese content (2 3%) in GLAs pig iron product GLA continues to evaluate a number of opportunities to further enhance project economics. These include: Additional revenue stream generated by sale of manganese fines product potential to reduce opex by ~10% (byproduct credit)

Operating Costs

US$/t

220 240

Capex Payback

US$m Years

360 5

IRR range of 16 20% (based on base & current pricing scenarios respectively) with potential to increase up to ~29% with manganese by-product included
1. 2. These results may not reflect the metallurgy of the overall deposit. Chinese provision of plant may reduce capital cost estimate.

Economics to be confirmed during feasibility study

18

Project Sensitivity

Price (US$/t) Production (000 tpa) Capex (US$ million) IRR Cashflow (US$ million/year)

400 400 360 18% 55

500 400 360 26% 90

600 400 360 35% 120

Price (US$/t) Production (000 tpa) Capex (US$ million) IRR Cashflow (US$ million/year)

400 600 480 21% 85

500 600 480 28% 130

600 600 480 38% 174

19

Economics of Plant Comparison

Brazil

Uruguay

US$/t Iron Ore Charcoal 208 195

US$/t 35 80 Own supply New technology improves yield Road transportation distance of <<100km vs 1000 to 1500km in Brazil All trucking to port, potential to use local railways Includes cost of sintering, fluxes, power, other consumables, labour, maintenance, administration etc.

Logistics

47

58

Other

45

67

TOTAL

495

240

20

The Latin Pig Iron Market Offers Direct Exposure to the US Economy
Gladiators Uruguay Project is ideally situated to supply pig iron to the North American market, one of the largest importers.
Merchant Pig Iron market - Overview Merchant Pig Iron (MPI) is produced in blast furnaces with the principal ferrous raw material being iron ore for steel production MPI trade tends to be more of a spot that a contract market with prices being fixed on a shipment by shipment basis The principal driver of MPI prices is scrap prices that move from month to month according to supply-demand balance Total global market in 2009 estimated to be 18.5Mt with the internationally traded market estimated to be 11.5Mt Excludes domestic China MPI market estimated to be 30-40Mtpa (no data published)
Million Tonnes

Steel Latin American Export Pig Iron Price FOB Vitoria

900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0
May-08 Mar-08 Mar-09 Nov-08 Jan-08 Jul-08 Jan-09 Sep-08

US$/tonne

Base case LT Price assumption of US$400/t

May-09

May-10

Nov-09

Mar-10

Sep-09

Cross Border Merchant Pig Iron Trade

20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6

Principal exporters are Brazil, Russia, India & South Africa Producers impacted by rising input costs (charcoal and iron ore)

Principal importing regions are North America, the Far East and Europe (Turkey, Italy & Spain)

4 2 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Source:

Bloomberg (11/11/10)

Sep-10

Nov-10

Jul-09

Jan-10

Jul-10

21

Project Timeline
2011 H1 H2 Orosur Earn In Resource Drilling Preliminary Feasibility Study Definition Drilling Feasibility Study Environmental Studies Permitting Detailed Engineering Construction Production
22

2012 H1 H2
80%

Future

20%

51%

Next Steps

Ongoing drill results Earn in additional 31% from Orosur to 51% Earn in additional 29% from Orosur to 80% Potential TSX listing Appointment of new CEO Potential complementary acquisition

23

Summary

Low cost Pig Iron producer Infrastructure in place Experienced project sponsors Strong cashflow potential project Company is well funded to execute on its plan

24

25